WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Saturday overturned the Washington, D.C., ban on carrying handguns outside the home, saying it was unconstitutional.

“There is no longer any basis on which this court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny,” said Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. of the District of Columbia District Court.

“Therefore, the court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional,” he added in his 19-page ruling on the case, Palmer v. District of Columbia, which has been dragging on for five years.

The court ordered the city to allow residents to carry handguns outside their homes and to let nonresidents carry them as well.

In 2008, the Supreme Court struck down the District of Columbia’s all-out ban on handguns on the basis that it violated the right to bear arms guaranteed by the Constitution’s Second Amendment. An appeals court in 2011 required handguns to be registered.

Thanks for the update! I brought this up to Cave a short time ago about how the local DC left wingers were flaunting Fed laws to craft bogus and easily dismissible local gun laws. He was unaware this was occurring so I'm glad I could educate him:

It sure seems like all of the issues are going the wrong way. And then you have the gun issue bucking that trend and actually moving in the right direction. It boggles the mind. But, if I'm only going to win one battle, the battle over the 2nd Amendment is the one I want to be winning.

__________________
"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealousy, boastfulness, and disregard of all the rules."

It sure seems like all of the issues are going the wrong way. And then you have the gun issue bucking that trend and actually moving in the right direction. It boggles the mind. But, if I'm only going to win one battle, the battle over the 2nd Amendment is the one I want to be winning.

Bingo

__________________A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don't have one... you'll probably never need one again.

It sure seems like all of the issues are going the wrong way. And then you have the gun issue bucking that trend and actually moving in the right direction. It boggles the mind. But, if I'm only going to win one battle, the battle over the 2nd Amendment is the one I want to be winning.

Not over immigration. Oh by the way, Hispanics are the #1 pro gun-control demo in the USA. So if you care about gun rights, you'll also care about immigration.

__________________
Some funny quotes from Hoots + Saul + DeezNutz

Spoiler!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

Yep, it's on Rotoworld.

THAT'S A HUGE TRADE for the Royals.

holy shit!!!

They turned Melky Cabrera into a LEGIT #2 starter. Sanchez is a beast with filthy stuff. When he's on, he's unhittable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saul Good

we just got a free #2/3 starter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

I realize that everyone has been waiting patiently for my take on this trade. To end all worry, I'll keep it short and say that this was an outstanding deal by DM.

It sure seems like all of the issues are going the wrong way. And then you have the gun issue bucking that trend and actually moving in the right direction. It boggles the mind. But, if I'm only going to win one battle, the battle over the 2nd Amendment is the one I want to be winning.

So it's obvious to me that Americans, as a group, are far more passionate about owning firearms than are people from other countries. Other nations - even other large, colonial nations with a European background - have banned firearms entirely, but to even suggest limiting them in America causes vocal and active opposition that other countries just don't generate. As an open question to the crowd, why do you suppose that is? What makes us so different?

The easy answer is that we have the Second Amendment, but that begs the response that we actually have (or still have) the Second Amendment because we have a communal love of guns, not the other way around.

So it's obvious to me that Americans, as a group, are far more passionate about owning firearms than are people from other countries. Other nations - even other large, colonial nations with a European background - have banned firearms entirely, but to even suggest limiting them in America causes vocal and active opposition that other countries just don't generate. As an open question to the crowd, why do you suppose that is? What makes us so different?

The easy answer is that we have the Second Amendment, but that begs the response that we actually have (or still have) the Second Amendment because we have a communal love of guns, not the other way around.

I don't know I just always thought it had something to do with how we won our Independence.

The only people this really even affects are those who already follow the law. Why in the hell Shouldn't they be allowed protection, especially in crime ridden shitholes like DC. I'm told the ghettos have crime too.